Weekly independent. [volume] (Elko, Nev.) 1887-1914, 1887-04-17
a. m A aAILaoAD scnEnE,

~
which the pe9ple Of Nevada nave looked
With 20 much Interest .0s u measure o.
relief from the unjust Discrimination,
Of the Central Pacific Railroad in th,
matter OF frrigbtS mas been the Subjvel
of much thought aud Ce have arrived
at the following couclaSion>:
FirSt: That the Interstate Com,
mrrce Law is a scheme gotten up for the
especial benefit Of the great Trans Con.
.tinentrl Railroads. Seeond: That the
great Speach Of Senator stanford, de.
.liveied ia the U. S. Senate Jan 10. 1857,
~-ostensibly against the measure was in
reality n part Of the plot to induce the
Congress Of the United States, n major
ity VI whose members are not directly
interested in railroads, to work for the
passage Of the bib.
In support OF the FIRST proposition it
is subj ient to offer IN argument the fact
that tue reports of the various railroads
show the los of many thousands Of dol
AAon'y ~ AZ kAhehhb VI PhHHCN
40 those whose influence is desired by
the several companies, and whose op.
position they could net aforl to invoke
by r-voking these passes without some
pTeteIt. aud IhsG was apparently found
in the provisions OF the hill in question,
though We desire to state ms our candid
ntNinfnn NhnN ~. SI.s. ~ NnNsa, 10. Al.
right to prohibit any person, company.
or corporation from carrying any per-
sou free Of charge if they desire SO to
do. While the local freight rates re.
main the same the railroads hive taken
advantage OF the new law to increase
through Takes to twice or thrice the for
ner charges. and Nevada merchants
Are compelled to pay n large increase in
ireights on goods ordered from cities
,nst OF the Missouri river These facts
show that the operation Il the Inter
State Commerce law will add millions
of dollars annually to the already pie
thoric %cufftrs OF the railroads. In sup
lnrt Of the second proposition We quote
frcm the speech Of Senator Stanford,
above referred to, in which the Senator
says;
"Tbe Southern Pacific strides the
Atlantic waters at u much less distance
than amy of its more northern COMPETE
tors. 1t has II line Of ensy gradI. mt,
comparatively, aud il completes not only
with its northern rivals, but iuur.. lar
81 nlaily with the Cape Horn and 18TH
mus OF Panama routrs, because Of it's
Shoner line ana ensirr gradients. In
this competition IL often takes freight
betwreu the two ocsaus ms low "a $40,
while il takes freight half way for, SAY,
$40 u ton-a most reasonable sum for
the limited local business of that com
fry. Now. il il only makes 81 net on
the freight from San Francisco to New
Orleans ut SO. 1t is glad 10 make that
one dollar where IL cannot nuke more;
but n ton Of freight going to FL PaSo,
something over half the distance. will
pay $50. Now. il the freight at SO u
ton to New Orleans pays 81 profit, the
fright going II less distance tn FL Pnsn
would pay as much profit ms tweuty-oue
tons going through to New Orleans"
1t has been "A subject of wonder why
the Senator should use such an argu-
lnent III a speech in opposition to the
pill, but recent developments lead to
III" conclusion that this statement Of the
gross Injustice practiced by the South
rrn Pacific Company, made 10y ole
whose knowledge Of railroad matters
will moi be questioned by unyon was
- part OF the plot TO secure the passage
Of the bill. These facts lend TO the con.
clucion ihnt the Interstate Commerce
bill was concocted in the interest of the
railroads, and passed into n law with
the coPsent Of the railroad mIgnntcs
who for effect offered IL feeble and
ephemerhl Resistance to its passage.
Will anyone contend that the juIi.
rious expenditure Of one or two millions
ot dollars would not have defeated the
bill i'll question? Had the railroads
seriously desiel the defemt OF the bill,
the disbursement Of that amount of coin
ny the comoIned corporations OF the
United States would have hnd no more
effect in criPpling their finances than
would the expenditure Of n four. bit
piece nf, ct mn ordinary citizen OF Elko.
SO far as developed, the only persons
benefited by the new law nre the owners
and managers Of railroads. and hence
the question which beads this article.